by Prue Bray on 30 January, 2022
This site already has buildings on it. So it would be difficult to argue against any form of development there. However, I do have big concerns about it being used as a Trojan Horse, to open up all the fields behind for housing. So this is what I said about it:
I disagree slightly with this allocation. This is on the basis that I have concerns about the extent of the area proposed to be allocated.
Appendix J: Development Guidelines in the Revised Growth Strategy, page 127, says the proximity of the Sindlesham Conservation Area requires sensitivity, and also that a landscape buffer is needed to help the transition between this new housing and the countryside.
I agree with both these points but would go further. Unless any new development on the site is confined to the area nearest King Street Lane, and is also carefully designed to close off the opportunity for further encroachment into the countryside, there is a distinct risk that it would not only impact on the Conservation Area but also open up the land behind the Conservation Area and across to Sadlers End for further development in the countryside. The arguments about the impact on the Conservation Area and the countryside are similar to those outlined in the Sustainability Appraisal on page 53.
Any such further development would increase traffic on King Street Lane, and cause further capacity issues at the traffic lights at the junction of King Street Lane and Hatch Farm Way beyond those already projected by modelling as a result of known development.
My proposed development boundary would be the area outlined in red on the image in Figure 2, and I would suggest a more appropriate maximum allocation would be 15 units, which would also reduce additional traffic onto King Street Lane.
Fig. 21 Comment